It's a bit different. You can 'reap the rewards of labour' for generations, but when TU kicks in, it'll be dead-end for all. As the 'owner of machines' you'll need consumers (with income) to buy from you. And the risk of angry mob raiding your house and taking over your goods and your power grows in line with the number of unemployed with no income.

So when TU becomes real issue, there should be mutual willingness to come up with some sort of solution. The biggest problem is whether the political elites (and those who pull their strings) have any long-term strategy rather than focusing only on the next few years.

Seems frank was massively down on his luck after that, I see he made a few big losses and disappeared from 'daily profit' table. Good to see he's still in a good mood tho (on chat).

I don't see it likely. First of all, they do directly benefit from this form of bitcoin activity, second of all, it would be very bad PR for them, and last but not least, if they did that, they would be possibly facing anti-monopoly actions and large fines (in some countries, where their lobby is weaker). You cannot just deny service because you don't like bitcoin, you'd need a better reason for that (and money-laundering/supporting terrorism is not a case here, since there's no anonymity).

It's pretty simple. Your BTC debit card provider (ie XAPO, Bit-x, Bitstamp etc) keeps your BTC funds and converts to fiat whenever you want to use the card, therefore you're paying with fiat (but it comes from your BTC deposit). So yes, it works like a regular card and you can pay pretty much everywhere.

He said there already are 2 exchanges (trading platforms), if there's not enough users (volume) opening another one wouldn't make much sense (unless those 2 are crappy ones).

If you meant altcoin trading platforms, then anyone from Turkey can use already established ones (Cryptsy, poloniex etc).

Ecommerce platform would require lots of customers and massive funds to get traction.

@OP, you could start with small online shop, just pick something that sells well, buy in bulk with discount from wholesaler, accept both BTC and fiat. You wouldn't have to be cheapest, but by accepting BTC you would get some extra exposure (free advertising on bitcoin directories and forums) and you'd have small advantage over competitors, especially if you provide international shipping.

What about fractional gold? You have few refineries in Turkey. I remember Nadir had fractional gold bars (below 1 gram; i.e. 0.1g or 0.05g), these could sell well for BTC, especially that most of sites that sell gold for bitcoins are based in US and shipping costs kill it for European buyers (and they don't offer fractional bars).

She probably knew as much as he was willing to tell her, and I don't see anyone would be willing to share with his mom that he helps people to buy/sell drugs and weapons over the internet etc.

The very first thing any country needs in terms of bitcoins is exchange services. Are those 2 you mentioned legit/registered?
You can always try your luck and register on local bitcoins, if no one else does it in your area, you can possibly earn decent money with little effort. Just make sure it is legal (declare your profits and pay taxes etc.) and never trade for cash in obscure places.

If there aren't many informational websites on what BTC is in Turkish, you could set up one, possibly add some faucet and get some advert income if traffic is high enough.

Yeah, but there are no freerolls anymore, so I assume he's talking about raked games. He can't really pull off the same stunt in raked games as he did in freerolls, it wouldn't end up very good for him.

I don't think anyone would mind if he actually started to play the rake games (risking his own funds) instead of just abusing freerolls.

I'd say, let him play.

I think you've got it slightly wrong. You don't lose your personal allowance if you earn above those £10k (unless you earn above ~£120k).

So if you earned say £15k, you still pay zero on those £10k and 20% on the remaining £5k. In other words, it doesn't make sense to reduce your working hours/earnings to stay in the lower bracket.

Sure, at first when the company manages to reduce their costs (automation, outsourcing etc.) they would enjoy higher profit margin, but once their competitors do the same, they would all have to reduce prices.
How many people could afford first mobile phones/first PCs/laptops/microwaves etc, and how many can afford them now?


You got any stats to support that? Quick google search proves you're wrong:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2408807/New-car-prices-risen-inflation-25-years.html

The fact that you lost doesn't say anything about trust of the particular casino. All of them have house edge, meaning that you're more likely to lose over time.

Do you think it would be different if you've used fiat casinos? I doubt that.

But yes, if you keep losing and the amount you've lost is significant to you, then, by all means, you should stop gambling all together.

That's a bummer:




I understand why you want to restrict yourselves from certain states of US, but why UK? I don't recall any other gambling sites blocking UK customers.

The judge must have valued the coins at the rate when the loan was made, or at the time the loan was due. Also included is interest and likely all the legal costs incurred by the lender.

Agree, too many victims choose to do nothing and just give up.

Although in this case, according to lender's lawyer it's uncertain whether he'll get his money back:

In the worst case scanario, when Bitcoin divides into 2 forks, the coins deposited before the fork will be withdrawable on any of the 2 forks (possibly on both, but not sure on this one).

There could be a problem with the coins deposited after forking. If you deposit using fork 1, you may be not be able to withdraw on fork 2. But your current holding is safe.

You're quoting post from 2013, author of which has been inactive for over half year. Don't expect a reply.

He didn't say machines will be cheaper, but that machines will make things cheaper, which is correct.
He didn't say unemployment is not a problem, but he pointed at possible solutions. Not entirely bad one, but rather ineffective and temporary imo.